Adding time when you should not, or failing to add time when you should, will result in a calendaring error.  If you fail to add an extension on your client’s behalf when you should have, the papers will be served and/or filed early.  This is not a problem.  But, if you fail to add an extension when calendaring the opposing party’s deadline, you would, at best, suffer embarrassment were you to contend that they were late.  If you err by adding an extension for your client when you should not, however, there will be dire consequences indeed:  a waiver of your client’s rights, and quite possibly, a malpractice claim against your law firm.  Clearly, then, it behooves anyone who manually calendars deadlines to take a close look at the exceptions.  But, first, some time-extension basics. 

For the most part, deadlines start running from service of some triggering document, e.g., service of interrogatories triggers the deadline for serving the response; service of responses to interrogatories triggers the deadline for serving a motion to compel further responses, etc.  Any service method other than personal service will result in a delay between the act of service (i.e., deposit in a USPS mail box, transmission to a fax machine, sending an electronic transmission), on the one hand, and the other party’s receipt of the document, on the other.  To obviate any prejudice in this delay in receipt, various extensions of time are added depending upon the method by which the triggering document is served.  These extensions of time are found in C.C.P. Sections 1013 and 1010.6 (for ease of reference, “Extending Statutes”), as follows: 

C.C.P. Section 1013 extends certain deadlines to act or respond for all service methods except electronic service (i.e., mail, fax, express mail or overnight delivery).  It provides that “any period of notice and any right or duty to do any act or make any response within any period or on a date certain after service of the document, which time period or date is prescribed by statute or rule of court, shall be extended by . . .” five days if mailed within California, and two court days if served via fax, express mail or overnight delivery.

C.C.P. Section 1010.6 extends certain deadlines to act or respond by two court days when the triggering document is served electronically. 

Before we tackle the various exceptions, we should differentiate between exceptions, on the one hand, and instances where the extensions are presumably inapplicable in the first place—deadlines which start running from mailing, not service.  For example, under C.R.C., Rule 3.1700, the deadline for filing and serving a memorandum of costs runs from, among other things, the date the clerk mails the notice of entry of judgment.  Under C.C.P. Section 411.20, the deadline for paying filing fees after bouncing a check runs from the date the clerk mails notice that the check bounced. 

There are at least two reasons why the C.C.P. Section 1013 extensions for service by mail should not be applicable to these deadline calculations.  First, C.C.P. Section 1013 expressly provides that the extensions apply to any period or date certain “after service” of a document.  It does not say “after mailing” of a document.  Second, where the triggering document must be mailed, and the deadline is therefore based on mailing, it would be counter-intuitive to add extra time for mail.  That is, unless the particular statute provides otherwise.  See, for example, C.C.P. Section 488.460, dealing with safe deposit box attachments.  This section requires the levying officer to mail notice to the judgment creditor that an additional fee is due, and provides a deadline of three business days “plus the extended time period specified in subdivision (a) of Section 1013 for service by mail” within which to pay that fee. 

Now, on to the exceptions.

Each Extending Statute contains three express exceptions: (1) “notice of intention to move for new trial,” (2) “notice of intention to move to vacate judgment pursuant to Section 663a,” and (3) “notice of appeal” (for ease of reference, “Express Exceptions”).  The hard and fast rule with Express Exceptions is simple to follow: do not ever add time when calculating one of these deadlines!  Instead, think “malpractice.” 

In addition to the Express Exceptions, the Extending Statutes allude to others, providing that the extensions apply in the absence of a specific exception provided by “any other statute or rule of court” (for ease of reference, “Specific Exceptions”).  You can find the Specific Exceptions by searching the Code of Civil Procedure and the Rules of Court for references to C.C.P. Sections 1013 and 1010.6. 

Your search will reveal Specific Exceptions referencing Section 1013 generally, thus making it clear that there is no extension for service by mail, fax, express mail, or overnight delivery.  You will find some that only except the extension for service by mail, leaving unanswered whether C.C.P. Section 1013’s extensions for fax or overnight delivery remain applicable.  You will not find a single exception specifically relating to extensions for fax service or electronic service.  You will, however, find one rule of court, very recently revised, which makes it clear that no extension is applicable, even for electronic service.  Let’s take a look at the Specific Exceptions your search may reveal.

Section 116.140 (Small Claims Actions) provides that “Section 1013 . . . on the extension of the time for taking action when notice is given by mail” does not apply to small claims actions.  This leaves unanswered questions:  What about service by fax or overnight mail under Section 1013, or electronic service under Section 1010.6?  Do those extensions apply?  The plain language of the relevant statutes as currently drafted dictate that they do:  Sections 1013 and 1010.6 both clearly provide that there is an extension in the absence of a Specific Exception, and this exception specifies mail, nothing else.  I am not, however, suggesting that you add an extension for everything but mail! 
 
Section 413.20 (Service of Summons By Mail) provides:  “If a summons is served by mail pursuant to this chapter, the provisions of Section 1013 that extend the time for exercising a right or doing an act shall not extend any time specified in this title.”  There are three provisions for serving a summons by mail:  (1) service by notice and acknowledgment of receipt under Section 415.30, (2) service by certified mail on an out-of-state defendant under Section 415.40, and (3) certified mail on a lessee in certain unlawful detainer actions under Section 415.47.  The exception makes clear that you do not add additional time for mail when calculating the response due dates.

Section 437c (Motions for Summary Judgment), which sets forth the deadlines for notices of motion, oppositions, and replies for motions for summary judgment and summary adjudication, expressly provides that Section 1013 does not apply.  This exception should not be surprising; the statute contains its own extensions of time for notice based upon service via fax, express mail or overnight delivery.  It would make no sense to add the C.C.P. Section 1013 extensions on top of the built-in extensions.  But, there is no mention of the extension for electronic service. 

Section 594 (Notice of Trial) provides that a trial or hearing may be held in the absence of the adverse party so long as the requisite notice has been given.  Subsection (b) provides:  “The time provisions of Section 1013 shall not serve to extend the notice of trial requirements under this subdivision for unlawful detainer actions.”  There is no mention of an exception for electronic service.

Section 659 (Notice of Intention to Move for New Trial) provides that the time “shall not be extended by . . . those provisions of Section 1013 of this code which extend the time for exercising a right or doing an act where service is by mail.”  Again, the specific reference to mail under Section 1013 might make one wonder what happens when service is by fax, overnight mail, or electronic service, but there is actually an answer to this one.  Notice of intention to move for a new trial is one of the Express Exceptions in Sections 1013 and 1010.6.  So, this is not really a Specific Exception at all.  It is just a very handy reminder that you never, ever extend the deadline for filing notice of intention to move for a new trial regardless of the service method. 
Section 663a (Notice of Intention to Move to Set Aside Judgment) provides that the “provisions of Section 1013 of this code extending the time for exercising a right or doing an act where service is by mail shall not apply to extend the time above specified.”  Again, as one of the three Express Exceptions, this is not a Specific Section, but a great reminder to never extend this deadline regardless of the service method.
 
Section 1005 (Regular Motions), which sets forth the deadlines for notices of motion, oppositions, and replies for regular motions, provides:  “Section 1013, which extends the time within which a right may be exercised or an act may be done, does not apply to a notice of motion, papers opposing a motion, or reply papers governed by this section.”  Like the Section 437c exception, this one is not surprising because Section 1005 contains its own extensions of time based upon service by fax, express mail, or overnight delivery.  But, what about electronic service? 
Section 1094.6 (Petition for Writ of Mandate) provides that the deadline for filing a petition for writ of mandate following a decision of a local agency other than a school district starts running from the date the decision becomes final.  Where there is a provision for a written decision or written findings, the decision is final on the date it is mailed to the party seeking the writ. Section 1094.6 provides that “Subdivision (a) of Section 1013 does not apply to extend the time, following deposit in the mail of the decision or findings, within which a petition shall be filed.”  Given that the decision is supposed to be mailed, however, Section 1013 is probably not applicable in the first place, making the exception superfluous. 

The cited statutes referring only to service by mail were drafted decades ago, when futuristic technological advances like fax and electronic service were not contemplated.  The statutes which exclude all C.C.P. Section 1013 extensions have not yet been amended in light of C.C.P. Section 1010.6.  But, things are beginning to change, at least in the Rules of Court.

C.R.C., Rule 3.1312, another Specific Exception, sets forth the time limit for a party to object to a proposed order.  Before it was amended as of January 1, 2011, the rule required the prevailing party to mail the proposed order to the opposing party, and allotted the opposing party a mere five days from mailing to notify the prevailing party whether or not it approves the proposed order.  Notwithstanding the fact that the deadline was based on mailing, the rule included a Specific Exception:  “Code of Civil Procedure section 1013, relating to service of papers by mail, does not apply to this rule.” 

The January 1, 2011, amendment made two key changes.  First, the rule no longer requires the prevailing party to mail the proposed order.  On the contrary, service by mail is impliedly prohibited; the proposed order now must be served by a means “reasonably calculated to ensure delivery to the other party or parties no later than the close of the next business day,” i.e., not U.S. Mail.  Second, the amended rule provides that:  “The extensions of time based on a method of service provided under any statute or rule does not apply to this rule.”  This all-encompassing language makes clear that there is no extension of time for any service method. 

We need more amendments like this.  Statutes which except extensions only for service by mail, should be amended so that they except all service methods under C.C.P. Section 1013 and C.C.P. Section 1010.6.  Rather than amending every Specific Exception, perhaps C.C.P. Section 1013 could be revised to provide something to the effect that:  “This extension applies in the absence of either of the following in any other statute or rule of court:  (i) a specific exception, or (ii) an exception referring to service by mail.”  C.C.P. Section 1010.6 could be amended to provide:  “This extension applies in the absence of either of the following in any other statute or rule of court:  (i) a specific exception, or (ii) an exception to one or more extensions provided by Section 1013.”  These amendments would go a long way toward eliminating the pervasive ambiguities with which we currently contend. 

In the meantime, if you have any doubt whatsoever, DO NOT extend your deadline.  The risk of malpractice is simply too great.  And, as I always recommend, use a rules-based computerized calendaring program like Deadlines.com (www.deadlines.com) to calculate your deadlines. 

Julie A. Goren, Esq. is the author of Litigation By The Numbers-Fourth Edition, a loose leaf updated every January and July with over 440 pages devoted solely to the intricacies of California civil litigation procedure, and the co-author of California Civil Litigation and Discovery, a more substantive text on California litigation.  She frequently lectures and writes about California state court calendaring, and changes to rules, forms, and codes.  For more information about her publications, visit www.litigationbythenumbers.com.

Atlanta, GA– Aderant, the world’s largest independent legal software company, today announced that its online legal deadline calculation service, Deadlines.com, has moved to a simpler pricing model that provides law firms with the ability to generate unlimited events for cases using the most dependable rules engine available. The new pricing went into effect on April 1, 2012.

The Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) Deadlines.com service utilizes Aderant CompuLaw’s court rules databases and patented deadline calculation technology to provide accurate, reliable, and comprehensive legal deadlines on a per case basis. Benefits of the new pricing model include:
• Ability to run unlimited date calculations as long as the case is open
• Easily bill back the cost of Deadlines.com to clients
• Prevent malpractice claims and potentially get professional liability insurance discounts
• Get ongoing rule notifications of all deadlines calculated for open cases
• Access the Aderant CompuLaw attorney support team
• Calculate important deadlines any time, any place

“Deadlines.com has been helping law firms dramatically reduce the risk of malpractice claims against lawyers by providing automated, rules-based calendaring for years,” stated Chris Giglio, chief executive officer for Aderant. “The new pricing model makes getting deadlines even more cost-effective and enables firms to pass along costs to their clients. Deadlines.com is a must-have service for all small firms.” 

###
About Aderant
Aderant, headquartered in Atlanta, is a global provider of comprehensive business management software for law and professional services firms. With a 30-year history as an industry leader, Aderant supports nearly 2,800 clients in more than 30 countries. Its clients represent 70 percent of the world’s largest firms and 60 percent of the AmLaw 200 across all segments of the legal market. Among these clients, Aderant has maintained a combined customer retention rate of more than 95 percent. Aderant’s complete suite of solutions includes: business development, calendar/docket matter management with built-in court rules, client relationship management (CRM), practice and financial management, time and billing, case management, document management, and business intelligence. Aderant helps firms more effectively manage, grow, and protect their businesses. More information is available at www.aderant.com.
Aderant and Aderant Expert are registered trademarks of Aderant Holdings, Inc. or its subsidiaries. All other trademarks mentioned herein are the properties of their respective owners.

Contacts:
Christine Smith
Global Marketing Director, Aderant
Phone: (404) 720-3628
Email: christine.smith@aderant.com

Jobst Elster
Vice President, Envision Agency
Phone: (850) 459-4947
Email: elster@envisionagency.com

Atlanta, GA – ADERANT, a comprehensive business management software provider for law and professional services firms of all sizes, today announced that its online legal deadline calculation service Deadlines.com (formerly Deadlines On Demand), has realized unprecedented online downloads via the new website interface. Launched in April, the web-based Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) application has been enhanced to help small firms better manage malpractice risks from missed deadlines. Over the past six months, legal secretaries, paralegals, and attorneys have used the new ‘pay-per-use’ site to help manage firm risk and save time on calendaring.

According to Sharie Foster, a litigation secretary with more than 24 years of experience in litigation supporting attorneys in firms and legal departments of all sizes, Deadlines.com is an essential tool for maximizing calendaring productivity and accuracy. “Legal calendaring, and specifically calculating court deadlines, is an extremely vital, yet time consuming task. Whether in a small or large firm setting, the calendaring process cannot be easily completed ‘on-the-fly’ by the firm’s legal secretary or docketing team. However, my experience using Deadlines.com shows that secretaries can save at least one hour per week per case. In a typical case load of ten cases, that’s a savings of ten hours per week that can be used for more strategic work,” stated Foster.

Hundreds of solo and small firm practitioners, legal secretaries, and paralegals are using the site and taking advantage of trial calculation offers. The new features and functions making the biggest impact to users include:

• Flat rate case pricing option: Allows users to run virtually all of the deadlines for a case providing a more cost effective option when generating several calculations. This pricing model allows lawyers to bill one charge back to their clients.
• Updated user and screen interface: The Deadlines.com user interface is intuitive and easy to use. Many of the jurisdiction and event selection screens have been enhanced so users can find what they need more quickly.
• Microsoft Outlook sync options: Includes syncing dates to multiple users’ calendars, automatically assigning times to ‘no time’ deadlines, and assigning Outlook categories by case reference.
• Enhanced event searching: True ‘Google style’ searching applies relevance scoring and makes suggestions that help users easily calculate deadlines.
• Reporting: Users can run a variety of PDF reports based on preferences (e.g., filtered by date, by case, by event) from the new ‘View Deadlines’ page.

“Deadlines.com is indispensable because it takes into account court rules and court holidays, all in one place. Knowing CompuLaw’s in-house attorneys actively research and keep the system up to date with the latest changes in laws, court rules, and local-level dates give me confidence in the data,” added Foster.

“Deadlines.com now gives firms even more flexibility and an affordable, effective weapon in battling the leading cause of malpractice claims – calendar related errors,” said Chris Giglio, chief executive officer for ADERANT. “The site was enhanced to give solos and smaller firms rules-based technology options that rival those used by larger firms and, in turn, provide affordable, strategic ways to better serve their clients.”

Deadlines.com utilizes CompuLaw’s court rules databases and patented deadline calculation technology to provide accurate, reliable, and comprehensive legal deadlines on a pay-per-case or pay-per-use basis. The service, designed to protect small law firms and their clients from missing critical court dates and deadlines, has the largest online rules library in the legal profession.

# # #
About ADERANT
ADERANT, headquartered in Atlanta, Ga., is a global provider of comprehensive business management software for law and professional services firms. ADERANT’s complete suite of solutions include: business development, calendar/docket matter management with built-in court rules, client relationship management (CRM), practice and financial management, time and billing, case management, document management, and business intelligence. ADERANT helps firms more effectively and profitably run, grow, and protect their businesses. More information is available at www.aderant.com.

Editor’s Note: The correct usage of the ADERANT name is all capitals.
ADERANT and ADERANT Expert are registered trademarks of ADERANT Holdings, Inc. or its subsidiaries.

Media Contact: 
Jobst Elster, Envision Agency
(850) 459-4947                                
elster@envisionagency.com               

Corporate Contact:
Stephanie Hall, ADERANT
(800)444-0020
stephanie.hall@aderant.com

Law firms face a growing volume of complex litigation requiring an astute understanding of rules, procedures and technologies. They must deal with more stringent business continuity and disaster recovery requirements, and risks of the “trade” such as malpractice claims and client confidentiality. Faced with such challenges, modern law firms are taking the lead in developing proactive and far reaching risk management strategies.

Thankfully, it does not take a rocket scientist (or a law degree for that matter) to lay the groundwork for sound risk management. Nor does it mean hiring highly compensated management consultants. It simply requires starting with the basics of law firm calendaring and docketing. Read More

We were introduced to the new Deadlines.com earlier in 2011. The new site and service included a spectrum of improvements. In fact, it was a new product all together and, like its predecessor, established as a pay-as-you-go, affordable service. Although DOD was a useful tool for our practice, the new Deadlines.com also helps us with client service. Deadlines.com is like having a virtual assistant in our pockets that keeps us up to date on all of the myriad calendar and court requirements, and even “taps us on the shoulder” when we need to prepare for upcoming dates.

In our practice, we have integrated Deadlines.com with Microsoft Outlook Calendar to update our calendars, send us reminders, and update new court requirements. Syncing our smartphones allows us all to take our Deadlines.com calendars with us, keeping us all updated on the go.

Deadlines.com includes the ability to preset advance notifications and reminders of all of our important litigation and court deadlines and dates and have those notifications delivered wherever and whenever we need and want—so we know exactly what the status is of our case and what we need to plan for in upcoming deadlines. Deadlines.com also notifies us when the court requirements have changed so that we can quickly react to each one. Deadlines.com even allows us to recalculate all of our critical dates when the court throws us a “curveball” like a change in hearing or trial date.

In addition to synchronization/integration with Outlook, with Deadlines.com we generate, email and print reports filtered by case, event, as well as various date ranges; view on-screen calendars with graphical views of all our attorney’s deadlines; and keep an offsite copy of critical deadlines in case of disaster.

We’ve found the Deadlines.com interface to be easy to navigate right from the start and were very pleased with the customer support provided. Combining Deadlines.com with Outlook and syncing it on our smartphones has made this an indispensable tool for our practice. I actually have no idea how we could operate without Deadlines.com and recommend it to anyone in need of a reliable and affordable law firm calendaring and critical date calculation solution.

Ross Veta is the Senior Attorney at Veta & Veta Attorneys At Law. Mr. Veta is licensed in California State and US Federal Courts and has been practicing law since 2000. Mr. Veta is an accomplished professional civil litigator with additional expertise in complex motion practice, contracts, contracts law, real estate, risk management, personal injury, and public interest issues. Mr. Veta has also served as corporate attorney, and professional negotiator for Fortune 500 companies. With extensive experience, expertise, and demonstrated success in all aspects of civil litigation and representation of hundreds of individual and business entities, Mr. Veta is highly regarded as one of the top attorneys in California.

This article originally appeared in the October ABA GP/Solo eReport.

ATLANTA– ADERANT, a comprehensive business management software provider for law and professional services firms of all sizes, today announced that it has acquired CompuLaw and Client Profiles, including its CRM4Legal division. These acquisitions create the world’s largest independent legal software company, giving clients worldwide access to a suite of products and services that will help them manage, grow, and protect their businesses. The company’s offerings will be the industry’s most complete suite of firm management software and services including: business development, client relationship management (CRM), practice and financial management, time and billing, case management, document management, automated court rules-based calendaring, and business intelligence.

With these acquisitions, ADERANT is building on its commitment to deliver world-class products and services that empower law and professional services firms to operate more effectively and profitably. To that end, Atlanta-based Client Profiles brings products in CRM and case management to ADERANT, while Los Angeles-based CompuLaw and subsidiary company Deadlines.com provide powerful risk management tools for firms of all sizes. Included as part of the transaction are CompuLaw’s well-known court rules-based calendar and matter management system, the SaaS-based legal deadline calculation service, and the largest and most comprehensive library of rules databases for any existing legal calendaring application with databases for nearly 2,000 jurisdictions and all 50 states. CompuLaw is known as a pioneer within the legal calendaring space, while Client Profiles is recognized for its expertise in case management services for small-sized firms.

“Our goal at ADERANT is to be the go-to software and services partner for law and professional services firms worldwide,” said ADERANT Chief Executive Officer Chris Giglio. “By expanding our product family with proven systems from CompuLaw and Client Profiles – two well-respected leaders in the industry – we’re strengthening our brand, bringing our clients the broadest set of capabilities, delivering the best technology in the industry, and ensuring we maintain the highest level of client satisfaction – all through the seamless integration of our offerings.”

Nearly 2,500 law and professional services firms around the world, including more than 60 percent of the AmLaw 200, benefit from ADERANT’s complete suite of business management software systems. Following the acquisitions, ADERANT will have clients encompassing nearly every segment of the legal market and will offer products for each segment’s unique needs. Giglio will continue as ADERANT’s chief executive officer. David J. Kalmick, president and chief executive officer of CompuLaw, will serve as Vice President of ADERANT CompuLaw, and Whit McIsaac, Client Profiles’ chief executive officer, will be Vice President of Business Development.

“We purchased ADERANT in 2008 with the intent to create the strongest software company for the legal and professional services market, and with the addition of CompuLaw and Client Profiles, we have taken a big step toward making ADERANT the premier provider in this space,” said Robert F. Smith, chairman of the board of ADERANT and chairman and chief executive officer of Vista Equity Partners. “Moving forward, we will continue to invest in ADERANT and its acquired product lines to make it an even more formidable company in the market.”

Nearly three decades ago, CompuLaw, whose clients include more than 70 percent of the AmLaw 100, created the market for automated court rules-based calendaring software for mid to large-sized law firms. Its web-based Deadlines.com brings malpractice risk management to smaller firms.

“For more than 30 years, CompuLaw’s commitment to quality, reliability, and service has earned us an outstanding reputation in the industry,” said Kalmick. “Because both ADERANT and CompuLaw have similar philosophies on quality and long-term customer satisfaction, joining the ADERANT family makes perfect sense. We will now be able to deliver new products and services more quickly to our valued clients, bringing unprecedented product reliability and comprehensive practice protection to the market.”

“Client Profiles is thrilled about coming together with ADERANT and CompuLaw,” said McIsaac. “Client Profiles wanted to grow larger and stronger to capitalize on the opportunities that we have worked so hard to develop in the marketplace, and this transition will enable us to do that. ADERANT gives us immediate scalability and its strengths are a perfect complement to our business model, our products, and our services. Existing clients will benefit from new product developments and enhanced services resulting from the depth and breadth of the ADERANT organization. This is one of the most exciting changes in the legal technology space in a long time, and we are looking forward to the future that can be built on this platform.”

###

About ADERANT
ADERANT, headquartered in Atlanta, Ga., is a global provider of comprehensive business management software for law and professional services firms. ADERANT’s complete suite of solutions include: business development, calendar/docket matter management with built-in court rules, client relationship management (CRM), practice and financial management, time and billing, case management, document management, and business intelligence. ADERANT helps firms more effectively and profitably run, grow, and protect their businesses. More information is available at www.aderant.com/together.

Editor’s Note: The correct usage of the ADERANT name is all capitals.
ADERANT and ADERANT Expert are registered trademarks of ADERANT Holdings, Inc. or its subsidiaries. All other trademarks mentioned herein are the properties of their respective owners.

Contacts:
Yolanda Landon
Arketi Group
Phone: (404) 929-0091 ext. 211
Email: ylandon@arketi.com

Adam Kincaid
ADERANT Public Relations
Phone: (678) 668-1028
Email: adam.kincaid@aderant.com

Los Angeles, CA – Online legal deadline calculation service Deadlines.com (formerly Deadlines On Demand), a wholly owned subsidiary of CompuLaw LLC, today announced the re-branded Deadlines.com service and completely redesigned website. Beyond simplifying the name to Deadlines.com, the web-based “Software-as-a-Service” has been enhanced to help small firms better manage malpractice risks based on missed deadlines. Deadlines.com service is now available with a flat rate pricing option, auto-emailed reminders of upcoming deadlines and auto-synchronization with Outlook, as well as a variety of PDF reports that users can run to check on deadlines, court dates and personal appointments. Based on thousands of users’ suggestions, Los Angeles-based Media Contour worked closely with the company’s programming team to create a fresh user experience with an updated, easy to understand user interface and numerous often requested features.

Deadlines.com utilizes CompuLaw’s court rules databases and patented deadline calculation technology to provide accurate, reliable and comprehensive legal deadlines on a pay-per-case or pay-per-use basis. The service, designed to protect small law firms and their clients from missing critical court dates and deadlines, has the largest rules library in the industry. Since the original launch of Deadlines On Demand, many small firm users have increasingly identified with and referred to the company as Deadlines.com. Simplifying the brand name of the service in this manner was a logical move for the company.

Beyond the name change and updated user interface, Deadlines.com provides a variety of upgrades. Notable feature enhancements include:
• Flat Rate Case Pricing Option: Allows users to run virtually all of the deadlines for a case, providing a more cost effective option for an increased number of deadlines. This “non- opened ended” pricing model allows lawyers to more easily bill the modest research charges back to their clients.
• Email Reminders: Includes consolidated deadline reminders by email for all users, even those who don’t rely on Deadlines.com’s automatic Outlook synchronization.
• Cloud Based SaaS: Increased service flexibility coupled with decreased maintenance and improved web-based functionality providing cost effective, anytime, anywhere delivery of critical deadlines, scheduling automation services, and effective backup/disaster recovery.
• New Outlook Sync Options: Includes “Synching Dates” to multiple users’ calendars, automatically assigning times to “no time deadlines” and automatically assigning Outlook categories by case reference.
• Enhanced Event Searching: True “Google style” searching applies relevance scoring and makes suggestions that help users easily calculate deadlines, even when the “triggering event” is not obvious.
• Reporting: Users can run a variety of PDF reports based on preferences (e.g., filtered by date, by case, by event) from the new “View Deadlines” page.

Usability and navigation enhancements include:
• Overall Website Navigation and Usability: Based on the fact that Deadlines.com is 100% web-based and often accessed remotely, keeping navigation intuitive and fast were main goals of the upgrade. Deadlines.com provides users with logical navigation to the most frequently visited areas including Coverage, Deadline Calculations, FAQs and Pricing.
• Updated User & Screen Interface:  Deadlines.com is as useful to paralegals, legal secretaries and solos as the user interface is intuitive and easy to use. Many of the jurisdiction and event selection screens have been graphically enhanced so users can quickly find what they need in a simple, straightforward fashion.

With Deadlines.com, attorneys, administrators, paralegals and legal secretaries can easily and painlessly generate a complete list of court deadlines by selecting just a few pieces of information such as case name, jurisdiction, event (e.g. trial) and date.

“Deadlines.com is easy to remember and even easier to use,” said David Kalmick, President and CEO of CompuLaw LLC and Deadlines.com. “After nearly two years of working with professional designers, our programming team and listening to thousands of users’ suggestions, we are thrilled to launch this new and improved, feature-rich website, all based on our clients’ feedback and input. The original site was developed to give solos and smaller firms, who often lack an IT infrastructure, rules based technology options that rival those that the larger firms use for automated calendar management. The new Deadlines.com gives firms even more flexibility and an affordable, effective weapon in battling the leading cause of malpractice claims – calendar related errors.”

# # #

About Deadlines.com
Deadlines.com, managed by Deadlines On Demand LLC, utilizes CompuLaw LLC’s court rules databases and patented deadline calculation technology to provide accurate, reliable and comprehensive legal deadlines, on a pay-per-case or pay-per-use basis.  The SaaS website, which protects small law firms
and their clients from missing critical court dates, is available at www.deadlines.com. Deadlines On Demand LLC (the owner of Deadlines.com) was founded in 2003 and is a wholly owned subsidiary of CompuLaw LLC.

Media Contact: 
Jobst Elster, Envision Agency
(850) 459-4947
elster@envisionagency.com

Corporate Contact:
Stephanie Hall, Deadlines.com
(800)444-0020
shall@compulaw.com